Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.
-- Bertrand Russell, "Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?", 1947
I think ole Bertrand was right. At least at the moment I do. I hope it isn't a permanent condition, because I find uncertainty to be very uncomfortable indeed. I really hope we and I can evolve to a point where good certainty is possible.
But at this moment in human development, total certainty gives us any of a great number of people who are willing to lie and cheat or even kill if it furthers a purpose which they are so certain about that everything else is unimportant.
A nun who worked at the infamous Irish Magdalene convents/slave camps said they could do what they did because of absolute certainty that they were right.
I have a strong suspicion that a very, very firm belief is a mental construct which has been erected as a defence against a crippling uncertainty. And it works too: most of the really effective people in the world have very strong beliefs. And don't get me wrong, most of them are very good people, no matter their faith or beliefs. And most of them accomplish excellent and worthwhile things. But it does not change the matter that faith may be an artificial construct. And I think we have to work towards a higher state where it is not necessary.
Lucid commented:
I don't think of certainty as you described it (willingness to lie, cheat, kill and steal for the validation of personal truths) to be anything close to faith or even strong belief.
People go to such lengths not because they feel strongly that what they say is unedniably and unequivocally true, they do it because deep down they themselves doubt their words and the rest is mere justification to eliminate this uncertainty.
On the surface, this appears very similar to what you actually said, but turning within one will find there is a huge difference between absolute, clear minded certainty (even of things unseen) and insecurity which masks itself as self-righteous bigotry and wickedness. The biggest difference is that the latter is much more complicated. The pure heart is simple. Not naive or unintelligent; that's a misgiving born of further justification on the side of the corrupt. Simplicity equates to minimalism. As few mental, emotional and spiritual resources are expended in each area as possible.
The righteous man knows what he believes and does so with a certainty. He has no need to convince the rest of the world that he is right, and contrary to his firm belief he is open to new ideas. He cares little about actually being right no matter how deeply held his convictions are. If you can demonstrate that he has made an error he will welcome correction. He never uses force unless he must turn away an aggressor.
Quite so. I just think that a righteous man who accomplishes great things without a very strong and basically artificial belief is very rare. Ghandi was probably one.
Terry commented:
But faith is the substance of things HOPED FOR and the EVIDENCE OF THINGS NOT SEEN. Without faith in anything you might as well live in a cave and eat berries the rest of your life.
Good point. What I am lamenting is the amount of things unseen. Why the hell do we need faith to believe in god, good, beauty, etc? It is a pitiful state and a pitiful world. These things should be present like the sun in the sky. And I do think they will become so one day. That is what I mean by evolve to a higher state.
8 comments:
Not at oil.
uncertainty is of course not knowing what decision should be made or passed over.
but faith is the substance of things HOPED FOR and the EVIDENCE OF THINGS NOT SEEN.
without faith in anything you might as well live in a cave and eat berries the rest of your life.
Over here in the US of A, there is more than a snowballing effect, it's an avalanche that is about to sweep away the "stay the course" mentality/insanity of the Iraq war.
I wish it could sweep away the idea that wars can accomplish anything good, but you take what you can get.
Wouldn't you know... I just took a short break to hear Andy Rooney of Sixty Minutes. He seconded me. Yippee!
When Nancy Pelosi becomes Speaker of the House, although she poo-poohed the idea on the same Sixty Minutes show, I'm hoping impeachment of Bush is the first item on the agenda.
Last but not least, Barak Obama as Prez in '08!
All the above from a peaceful anarchist who doesn't vote. It's just that the world needs desperately to escape from the corner into which Bush and Blair have painted it.
I'm hoping impeachment of Bush is the first item on the agenda.
David, I'm with you 1000 percent! He needs REMOVED BECAUSE OF HIS CRIMES AGAISN'T IRAQ AND AMERICA!
The difference between Vietnam and Iraq was that BUSH had an exit stragedy for Vietnam!
Blah, blah, blah.
1. Without doubt, there is No Faith.
2. Look it up (you are the wonderer, not me): As Certainty Approaches 1, I.Q. Approaches nil (really).
Where can I look it up?
I have certainty in several things. Like E = mc², or rectangle area = length x width. (Not to sound square!)
But I'm also positive that there are some things I can never know for sure, whether because they are always undetermined, or shifting, or blurry, or simply because it's too much pointless effort to check everything. As Descartes could have said, "I'm sure that I can't be sure about most things". An insecure bigot using the justification of faith to quit thinking or questioning himself is, well, pathetic. I know some people like that, who make it a principle never to have any doubts, "never to make mistakes". They are also very miserable, and at one point you always realize they are to be pitied (once you can get far away from them!). Faith is normal, and necessary, at least to keep believing in your ideals. But healthy doubt is equally vital. Man cannot live without water, and he can't do without fire either, even though they are fundamental opposites. Each has its time and place.
"it does not change the matter that faith may be an artificial construct."
Once you understand and accept that, faith will never be a handicap to you again. I'm always prepared to reconsider my beliefs. Especially about "politician X or religious leader Y really seems a decent person"...
The greatest mistake is to believe that you can avoid making any mistakes.
Of course, by the "beliefs" I'm ready to reconsider, I mean what I think to be true facts. The fundamental beliefs, like love, decency, core principles that found my human nature... can and must be untouchable. An example of this distinction is patriotism. If I love my country, I'll always protect it; but my country's regime may very well be rotten and needing to be overturned, it may even be the worst threat to my country. Absolute and circumstancial, the core and the skin.
"The pure heart is simple."
Oh yes. Being honest and pure makes life SO much less complicated! There are just too many ways to do wrong, right? ;-)
I remember a delicate situation where the details were very complicated, but focusing on the right thing to do made everything clear and the rest trivial. It makes one wonder in amazement how others can manage to stay so blind when the light is right there in front of everybody. I don't feel any superior in such moments. Just "normal". And sorry that I can't make the simplicity visible to those who keep their eyes shut.
"The righteous man [...] has no need to convince the rest of the world that he is right"
Beautifully put. And it explains so much.
"I just think that a righteous man who accomplishes great things without a very strong and basically artificial belief is very rare."
Well, I'm not so sure about that. Righteousness is intrinsic to a person, and doesn't really need justifications or incitation. Only a bit of courage to act sometimes. Weren't YOU the one trying to convince us that not everything/everyone is rotten in this world? :-)
"Without faith in anything you might as well live in a cave and eat berries the rest of your life."
Probably. I just resent the people who want to sell you the leading brand as "the only possible choice". I turned mostly away from "classic" religion, when I felt that most of it (where I live) was just cumbersome accessories. Most of what I have faith in fears no scientific discovery or the like, because it's not only fundamentally human, it's "self-evident truth".The kind of things that fanatics have no hope of one day "un-teaching" ME, no matter how much it seems that "God said so" after some convoluted "illuminated" bellowing.
I have faith in what every human being spontaneously knows and feels before a twisted society clutters his mind with various arbitrary nonsense. "Be pure like the children."
I love kids. :-)
"Why the hell do we need faith to believe in god, good, beauty, etc?"
Well, when you say "why the hell" you're subconsciously confessing you've assimilated the classic religious beliefs. Or, it may just be the force of verbal habit. ;o)
"These things should be present like the sun in the sky."
Evident things are evident, period. If somebody feels the need to constantly repeat that "the sky is blue", you need to question both his motives and what he's saying. Like "Allah akbar" really means not "God is Supreme" but "believe in everything I say because I am always using the highest reference".
I confess, I like being told things like "you're nice", or "I love you". It's pleasant, from time to time. But I damn well don't NEED to be told so every other day or minute. When I know someone's feelings, that's that, and now let's say some interesting or entertaining stuff! Which makes me wonder... if a clearly imperfect human like me can have such an attitude, why should a perfect God DEMAND that you sing and pray His name constantly? Perhaps because, in fact, it is His claimed representatives who NEED the reference to be rehashed ad nauseam to constantly comfort their legitimacy. And if someone needs to insist, if things are not self-evident, if the sincere people don't seem like they'll respect them spontaneously, then it's likely that His Televised Holiness Ahatollah George W. Stalin-Jong-Il has some skeletons in his wardrobe. Or under his robe...
"That is what I mean by evolve to a higher state."
If I feel like I'm more or less at that state, and that it's not such a big deal, then maybe this means bad news for those who see this state too high in the clouds to even make out. It's as if we spend a big part of our lives un-learning masses of stupidity that only veil our sight when we once could see the top of the mountains, radiant in their eternal snow cap. Praised be Sagarmatha.
"All the above from a peaceful anarchist who doesn't vote."
This is the only point where I have to totally disagree with you, David. Vote. If you don't, you're not trying to change things.
"What if there's nobody worth voting for?" Well, then, I guess you may just try and see how come some independants can get elected by the aspirations of the other peaceful anarchists in the silent masses. Vote. Always try, and try again. Not voting seems to me identical to giving up.
Have you ever wondered why many people bother to vote, only to cast a blank vote? They're making the effort of sending a "No" message. And isn't a blank vote supremely peaceful and anarchist? :-)
"I don't think of certainty as you described it [...] to be anything close to faith or even strong belief."
Ah, yes. But aren't a great number of people mistaking certainty with faith? And therefore, convenience with divine duty? It is not just a debate about semantics, but about the influence of semantics in the debate's issue.
Just like the unsure nuance about criticizing a religion as it is or insulting its bases. Or discussing the principles of a religion versus insulting all of its followers collectively...
"Then there is the idea that being right is paramount to all else."
Are you sure you're not mistaking there? ;o)
"Then, not knowing how to rid oneself of these conflicting emotions, a man tries to compensate which results in a number of harmful actions, which he justifies, and then he justifies the justifications, and..."
It's scientifically known as "cognitive dissonance", and shown to be the basic principle behind brainwashing, cults, and totalitarian endoctrination. Step by step, seemingly very gently, push the sucker further and further, until the simple idea of possibly having been so hugely wrong is impossible for the ego to accept. And then, the washed brain is cleansed of al possible doubt. There must be articles on the web about this. It's not specific of the over-developed ego, but near-universal as a principle. Over-developed egoes just make it more extreme, as do over-pushed errors.
But clearly, Mr Lucid Tovaritch, something went wrong in YOUR process. The political police will have to check this out...
I'd dare say that the most intelligent man is he who is able to say to himself : "I've been SO stupid!"
"The difference between Vietnam and Iraq was that BUSH had an exit stragedy for Vietnam!"
I almost didn't get it at first. "Bush had an exit strategy for Vietnam". Excellent one, Terry!
(^_^)
"As Certainty Approaches 1, I.Q. Approaches nil"
Isn't that a hyperbole?
Or a hyperbola?
No, wait. I think that in a hyperbola, I.Q. would approach nil (without ever reaching it) as Certainty would approach infinite.
Same difference. :oP
Post a Comment